Apparently, On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 11:38:07PM -0500,
        John Baldwin said words to the effect of;

> I'm currently testing the following patch whcih is a subset of the td_ucred
> changes.  It involves no API changes, but only contains 2 basic changes:
> 1) We still need Giant when doing the crhold() to set td_ucred in
>    cred_update_thread().  This is an old bug that is my fault.  I knew that
>    PROC_LOCK was sufficient yet which was my reason for not using td_ucred. 
>    However, we could still be derferencing a stale p_ucred and doing very bad
>    things, so this needs to be fixed until p_ucred is fully protected by the
>    PROC_LOCK.  This also means that td_ucred is now safe to use.  As such:
> 2) All the "easy" p->p_ucred -> td->td_ucred changes that don't involve the
>    changes to API's such as suser() and p_canfoo().  The next patch in this
>    series will most likely be the suser() API change.

The UGAR changes in sysv_sem.c to not leak Giant are most unreleated and
should probably be committed separately.  I wonder who introduced the leaks
in the first place.

Other than that I don't see anything wrong with this.  Commit it.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to